published Wednesday, November 14th, 2012

What is the World Health Organization hiding?


by Drew Johnson

On Tuesday, the United Nations gave Americans yet another reason not to trust their tax dollars, policy decisions or military forces with the increasingly outlandish international organization.

The World Health Organization -- the UN's public health policy arm -- kicked the public and the media out of a discussion of a proposed international tobacco tax during its biennial tobacco control meeting.

The WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, which is meeting this week in the South Korean capital Seoul, began on a high note. The convention's member countries on Monday ratified an agreement to fight smuggled and pirated tobacco products.

That goodwill was quickly destroyed when delegates of the member countries of the conference stripped the media of the ability to cover the meeting and escorted public onlookers from the premises. The decision to meet behind closed doors occurred when a discussion began about efforts to decrease tobacco use by increasing the price of tobacco products.

As the session began, the session's chairwoman expressed concern that there was a "large presence" of tobacco growers and industry representatives in the public gallery. That would be unsurprising, since the discussion has a significant impact on the livelihood of the tens of millions of people employed by tobacco farming and production. The countries then agreed to make the rest of the meeting private.

This decision to blockade people who make a living off of tobacco from WHO discussions is nothing new. Tobacco growers and the tobacco industry are not allowed in the convention, cannot have a voice about tobacco regulations invented and implemented by the WHO, and have been constantly vilified during the first two days of the convention. Instead they must try to get in by waiting in line each day for a limited number of public passes that allow them simply to observe, but not participate, in the meeting.

Not content with just barring the public from sitting in on the discussion, the convention leaders went on to ban journalists from the session, as well.

As a reporter covering this meeting, this was not only a frustrating stance, but it raises some serious questions about an organization that for years has operated largely behind the scenes and without the benefit of much public scrutiny. When is the media more necessary than when an unaccountable, shadowy organization that devours millions of tax dollars each year from people across the world debates getting in the business of issuing global taxes?

The WHO's effort to silence the press is particularly chilling since, while the organization is busy booting the media from its own meetings, its parent organization, the United Nations, claims to fight to advance "free, independent and pluralistic media" across the world.

Apparently, UN and WHO leaders believe in media rights in all cases except when the media covers them.

Of course, judging by the topics discussed so far during the WHO's tobacco control convention, there is little wonder why the international bureaucrats wanted to prevent the media from hearing more.

For example, the representative from the Pacific island nation of Palau encouraged the WHO to also consider an international tax scheme for candy, sodas and even alcohol. Shockingly, a number of other member countries expressed their support of the frightening idea.

When a representative of Ukraine expressed concern that tobacco regulations may compromise the independence of individual nations, and a Cuban official encouraged the convention attendees to be mindful of the many hardworking farmers whose lives depend on tobacco, they were met with rolled eyes and scornful looks.

Fortunately, the United States is one of only 18 countries in the world that has not signed on to be a member of the WHO's Framework Convention on Tobacco Control. That won't be the case if some American health officials have their way. A representative of the U.S. government, speaking as an observer state, said she hopes that U.S. will become a full party to the convention "in the near future."

Tuesday's outrageous attack on the principles of a free press should be further proof to Americans that we should stay far away from this tyrannical international government body.

8
Comments do not represent the opinions of the Chattanooga Times Free Press, nor does it review every comment. Profanities, slurs and libelous remarks are prohibited. For more information you can view our Terms & Conditions and/or Ethics policy.

I dare you to examine the real costs of tobacco usage in the world.

Heck, just take a look around you, and see the litter left behind by smokers.

November 14, 2012 at 12:26 a.m.
nucanuck said...

The free prees that Drew longs for is long gone. What remains is a corporate press that writes about what their corporate bosses and advertisers want. That is why the internet has become the go-to source for information.

And how much sympathy is out there for the tobacco industry? Little to none.

November 14, 2012 at 1:04 a.m.
dew930 said...

I can't believe that an unelectable bureaucracy like the UN is doing this. Shame on them. Congress needs to defund the UN right now.

November 14, 2012 at 7:19 a.m.
rolando said...

Yeah, but think of all the tax money coming into the various governments and the UN -- and that, friends [and foes] is what makes the world go 'round...and always has.

"The convention's member countries on Monday ratified an agreement to fight smuggled and pirated tobacco products."

Uh-huh. As with moonshine, smuggled/pirated products being in no tax money...and that is the only reason they agreed to the ban.

November 14, 2012 at 11:59 a.m.

Even in New York, the cost of a pack of cigarettes is lower than the costs.

Sorry.

November 14, 2012 at 5:33 p.m.
fairmon said...

happywithnewbulbs said...

Even in New York, the cost of a pack of cigarettes is lower than the costs.

Where did you get that statistic? I don't smoke and I don't care how much the U.S. taxes them but I do not want to see the door opened for the U.N. to tax anything. Actually I don't see a return on investment should a cost benefit analysis be done on membership in the U.N.

I would question any study that tried to differentate the need for cleaning smoking residue in N.Y.C. or health issues that may be smoking related when other life style issues are considered. We are talking about N.Y. city primarily, actually the state has vast areas of farm land and forest that are pristine clean.

November 15, 2012 at 4:10 p.m.
fairmon said...

The article is about suppressing the press not about the hazards of tobacco use. Banning the press and smoking are both hazardous.

November 15, 2012 at 4:12 p.m.

harp3339, there are numerous analysis of the net costs from smoking a pack of cigarettes.

And no, I wasn't talking about a study specifically of New York City, just referencing New York City and it's well-known taxes of packs of cigarettes as a baseline.

http://www.oregonlive.com/health/index.ssf/2010/09/the_true_cost_of_a_pack_of_cig.html

http://www.healthylifeinfo.com/healthlib/article.asp?file=smoking_40_per_pack_cost.html

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/2009-04-08-fda-tobacco-costs_N.htm

http://www.thefrugaltoad.com/personalfinance/smoking-cigarettes-hazardous-financial-life

http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/price-smoking

http://www.lung.org/associations/states/california/for-the-media/new-study-says-quitting.html

You may quibble over these numbers as you wish, but I would still less smoking, and I can live with both tobacco farmers and pulmonologists finding other work to do.

November 15, 2012 at 6:53 p.m.
please login to post a comment

videos »         

photos »         

e-edition »

advertisement
advertisement

Find a Business

400 East 11th St., Chattanooga, TN 37403
General Information (423) 756-6900
Copyright, Permissions, Terms & Conditions, Privacy Policy, Ethics policy - Copyright ©2014, Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc. All rights reserved.
This document may not be reprinted without the express written permission of Chattanooga Publishing Company, Inc.